The overline at the top of the fundraising letter reads, “You can join your neighbors to help families facing hunger.”

So far, so good. Everybody’s against hunger. Then, this: “Every $1 can help feed a family of 3!”

One thing’s for sure: that exclamation point is certainly justified if only one dollar can feed a family of three. That’s amazing, especially with food prices the way they are today.

The body copy of the letter begins: “This is the time of year when we pause to reflect on what we’re grateful for…” It goes on in that vein for a few paragraphs, talking about hunger and the holidays.

Then, here it is again: “every $1 you give to [charity] can help provide 3 meals – enough to feed a family in our community.”

So, a little confusing here. First, $1 feeds a family of three. Then, $1 provides three meals. Apparently, feeding a family means just one meal per person. But that’s not the real difficulty here.

No, the problem is the believability of the offer: $1 feeding a family of three. How could that possibly be? It’s just not a credible statement. It’s not believable. The letter explains that it’s “because of our network of food pantries and food bank partners,” but that’s really not much of a rationale.

Wait, hold on a sec. I see what’s going on here. It’s that weasel-word “help.” “Every $1 can HELP feed a family of 3.” We’re not saying that every $1 actually will feed a family of three. No, we’re saying every $1 can help.

Well, if that’s the case, then, technically speaking, every $1 that I give can help feed a family of 10. It can help feed all the families in the city. It can help feed all the families in the state. Technically, every $1 that I give can help end world hunger. Because, you know, wink, wink, we’re not saying that every $1 actually will end world hunger — we’re just saying that it can help.

Call me skeptical, but this kind of thing seems a little questionable. It’s almost as if the charity is counting on donors simply glancing at this and thinking, “Hmm, one dollar feeds a family of three? Okay, I’ll give,” without even noticing the little weasel-word that undercuts the whole thing.

It’s too bad. The appeal starts with a good template for an offer along the lines of “$XX will feed XX people,” but then it goes sideways. It uses numbers that strain credibility and defy simple common sense, and then on top of that, it makes the whole thing misleading for donors.

First of all, why raise questions in donors’ minds with numbers and dollar values that seem completely unreasonable? Second, and probably more to the point, wouldn’t it have been better to figure out what the actual dollar value is for providing a meal, and then build a case for giving around that as an opportunity for donors to do good? That way, the offer to donors would be believable as well as credible. And at the end of the day, that’s the kind of offer that’s going to work best in the short term and the long term to move donors to give and keep them giving to support a cause.